Susquehanna Canal Co. v. Wright
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Adams county. William Wright against the Susquehanna Canal Company. This proceeding originated upon the petition of William Wright, setting forth: “ That he is the owner of a tract of land in Hellam township, York county, bounded north-west by land of the heirs of James Wright, north and east by the Susquehanna river, south by Limekiln Alley in the borough of Wrightsville, west by land of James Wright’s heirs ; that by an Act of Assembly passed…
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Adams county. William Wright against the Susquehanna Canal Company. This proceeding originated upon the petition of William Wright, setting forth: “ That he is the owner of a tract of land in Hellam township, York county, bounded north-west by land of the heirs of James Wright, north and east by the Susquehanna river, south by Limekiln Alley in the borough of Wrightsville, west by land of James Wright’s heirs ; that by an Act of Assembly passed 11th February 1803, the said William Wright was authorized to lead off and use part of the waters of the Susquehanna upon…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Gibson, C. J.
The principle which rules the first point in the cause has been determined since the former argument of it, in the Monongahela Navigation Company v. Coons, in which it was held that the State is never presumed to have parted with one of its franchises in the absence of conclusive proof of such an intention. It was held that the license accorded to riparian owners, by the public Act of 1803, to erect mill-dams in navigable streams, is defeasible and subordinate to the public will. The license accorded by this private act is, for reasons…
2Cited by21 opinions
- Eaton v. B. C. & M. R. R.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1872
- Hanlin v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1884
- Lewis v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1893
- Watuppa Reservoir Co. v. City of Fall RiverMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Black River Improvement Co. v. La Crosse Booming & Transportation Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.